7e7! - DA.C
 

Go Back   DA.C > Local Control > 1:1 Scale Commercial Aviation
Supported by:

View Poll Results: What do you think the 7E7 will be called
7E7 21 26.58%
787 43 54.43%
797 2 2.53%
808 11 13.92%
other( please list) 2 2.53%
Voters: 79. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 12-14-2003, 03:02 PM   #1 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 159
Default 7e7!

Well
psamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-14-2003, 07:40 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
INTENSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 178
Default

I think the answer is pretty obvious...

-Rich
INTENSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2003, 07:40 PM   #3 (permalink)
Retired Hookah Master
 
richie154's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Valley of Heart's Delight
Age: 36
Posts: 3,718
Send a message via AIM to richie154 Send a message via Yahoo to richie154
Default

It will be called whatever Boeing decides to call it...
__________________
The Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. An evil soul producing holy witness is like a villian with a smiling cheek, a goodly apple rotten at the heart. Oh, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

Private Pilot: 10/20/2005
Private Multi Engine: 05/09/2008
The more things change, the more Mesa still sucks.
richie154 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 12-14-2003, 08:16 PM   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 547
Default

well since the aircraft is suppose to be the best in efficiency for airlines... just keep the 7e7 name...
BHopper88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2003, 10:56 PM   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 405
Default

LMAO. "United 403, cleared to land, number two for landing. Follow "Dreamliner" on finals.
no duh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2003, 05:55 AM   #6 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
newsnerd99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: MDT
Posts: 1,538
Default

Well, it definetly has to have a 7 in it...every Boeing since the 30's (I think) has had some 7 connection...B-52 (5+2=7), B-47, B-17, B-29 (9-2=7). Maybe they will introduce an entirely new equation!
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
THE GIANT DIECAST SALE IS ENDING!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


80+ MODELS LEFT! PRICES REDUCED!

HERPA * GEMINI * DRAGON * HOGAN
Fill in the gaps in your collection * fast service

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
newsnerd99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2003, 08:20 AM   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 544
Default

Rumors are its to be the 808, because they want to enter a new era, so get rid of the 7 and add an 8
Galapagapop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2003, 09:05 AM   #8 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 629
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Galapagapop
Rumors are its to be the 808, because they want to enter a new era, so get rid of the 7 and add an 8
In that case, I can't wait to see the 848! What airlines will eventually replace the A380 with.
Richard Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2003, 09:56 AM   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,172
Default

?????.......
mikeytex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2003, 10:23 AM   #10 (permalink)
Complete Wacko!
 
Chansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 3,070
Arrow Boeing's call!

Will go with it. But I would have gone with 787.
Chansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2003, 11:00 AM   #11 (permalink)
Complete Wacko!
 
Chansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 3,070
Lightbulb Look at this McDonnell Douglas Ad.

From here: http://www.airchive.com/SITE%20PAGES/MEM-DOUGLAS.html

That MD-XX has windows similar to 7E7!
Chansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2003, 09:36 AM   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 798
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Galapagapop
Rumors are its to be the 808, because they want to enter a new era, so get rid of the 7 and add an 8
These rumors have abounded and if Boeing's recent history of trashing every hard-earned dime of intellectual currency remains consistent, they'll throw away the 7-7 lineage as well. Find me anywhere a line of products that have as much public awareness as the 707 thru 777. They've been 50 years in the making and are still held in the highest regard. Query the 'average joe' about an airplane name and 90% of them will say "747". The Boeing Company's rush to 'reinvent their core competencies' has been a disaster and choosing a different name for the 7E7 line would just be remaining consistent with the rest of their misguided approach to business.

Last edited by Tony Sepanski; 12-16-2003 at 09:37 AM.
Tony Sepanski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2003, 04:21 PM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
ykiki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Seattle
Age: 54
Posts: 234
Default

I'm voting for the 7E7, simply because today's press conference was about the "7E7" and inside Boeing, it is still referenced as the 7E7.
ykiki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2003, 11:35 AM   #14 (permalink)
Gold Tail Fever!
 
Seluryar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Akron, Ohio
Age: 37
Posts: 600
Default

I agree with BHopper88 for the same reason.
__________________
My other car is a Boeing 757
Seluryar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2003, 08:30 AM   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,426
Default

Oh I don't know... Perhaps they will call it the 7E7?
R. Minor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2003, 04:36 PM   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 405
Default I rather have it stay as the 7E7 instead of a stupid 787.

I propose the Dreamliner to be designated in the 8 _ 8 series for a new era of commercial airplanes. Afterall, 50% composite materials for an aircraft is a big step from using 80% aluminum. Come on, 100 years ago, planes were made from wood and muslin, then came metal, now it's composites. I want 8(something)8, like the 808. The 7_7 era was a great one, but let's move on. Don't let traditions inhibit progession! Build upon progression to create tradition. That sounded stupid, so I'll stop here.

I remembered someone wanting to do a fantasy aircraft, something similar to the 727. I found the picture. Sadly, if the Dreamliner is designated the 787, it is a shame for the artist who named his conceptual aircraft.

Presenting the Boeing 787-300 by dkdesign...
no duh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2003, 05:48 PM   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,426
Default

Love the 787 pic... Well done.
R. Minor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2003, 02:56 PM   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,513
Exclamation

I heard rumors that they will call it Boeing 7psamurai7.
But that's just a rumor, we'll have to see what the future brings...
Lufthansa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2003, 07:37 PM   #19 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
DLmd11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,285
Default

I hope that Boeing finishes the 7?7 series through to the 797.

There is the rest of this century to do the 8?8 series of aircraft. Hopefully one of these will be an SST. Maybe the 828 going twice the speed of sound!

After all it took only less than half a century to get as far as they did with the 7?7 numbers.

BTW, doesn't the MD-12 in the above post look just like the A380?

DLmd11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2003, 09:39 PM   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 92
Default

787
AASilverbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2003, 12:38 PM   #21 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 292
Default

808: 21st century, new series of planes. Out with the old, in with the new.

I liked the Douglas aircraft photo. So that's where Airbus got the A380 design..............
CAL 757-300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2003, 04:54 PM   #22 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 405
Default

I still haven't voted.

When the 7E7 is built, that'll be one step closer to the end of the great aluminum planes... Boeing will build them aircrafts with composite materials... How innovative, yes? Airbus using aluminum for the 380, no?
no duh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2004, 01:31 PM   #23 (permalink)
Lunar loops!
 
AirDar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Land of BBQ & thin chips
Posts: 1,788
Default Re: I rather have it stay as the 7E7 instead of a stupid 787.

Quote:
Originally posted by no duh!
...I remembered someone wanting to do a fantasy aircraft, something similar to the 727. I found the picture. Sadly, if the Dreamliner is designated the 787, it is a shame for the artist who named his conceptual aircraft.

Presenting the Boeing 787-300 by dkdesign...
This was one of mine. I REALLY loved the 727 and miss flying on them... as a What-if I proposed this as where the 727 could have gone as an adjunct to the 757 series prior to the creation of the NG 737's. Similar capacity but retaining the short field ability... Glad you liked it!
__________________
Dar~

He lives in a world of fantasy
...and that's a world I'd like to see!
AirDar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2004, 09:57 PM   #24 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
Sgt Caribou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 57
Posts: 1,987
Default

Not to sound cranky, but wasn't the big argument against Airbus in the last decade due to their perceived inferior "plastic construction" in utilizing extensive composites - they were the ones who took the plunge and went ahead with this innovation (and fly-by-wire for airliners). Now Boeing announces their latest & greatest innovation, namely more composites used in construction of the aircraft, well been there & done that already!

The 7e7 pic above looks like a futuristic 777 concept to me. Although they are promising great advances in interior comfort and "innovative construction", it doesn't seem to offer a great enough leap over anything the competition has to offer (e.g., as far as capacity & flight performance are concerned). Take a look at the A340-500/600 and A380 as examples - even if not meant for the same markets, it shows what a formidable opponent Airbus has become in a mere 30 years. The last thing I want to see is Boeing go by the wayside in the commercial aviation industry, but the time seems ripe for them to use their inventive spirit to get something on the market way beyond what the other guys can offer. Let's hope the 7e7 lives up to its promises.
__________________
Brian
Sgt Caribou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2004, 11:50 PM   #25 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
INTENSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 178
Default

Quote:
it shows what a formidable opponent Airbus has become in a mere 30 years.
That's about a THIRD of the entire history of aviation. I'd say they've had plenty of time.....that and the inflow of cash from taxpayers of numerous European countries.

-Rich
INTENSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2004, 01:20 AM   #26 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 405
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by INTENSS
That's about a THIRD of the entire history of aviation. I'd say they've had plenty of time.....that and the inflow of cash from taxpayers of numerous European countries.

-Rich
Haha... True!

Btw... Weren't the F-16's the first to utilize FBW? Or was it the L-1011? Somebody clarify?
no duh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2004, 01:24 AM   #27 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 405
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Sgt Caribou
Not to sound cranky, but wasn't the big argument against Airbus in the last decade due to their perceived inferior "plastic construction" in utilizing extensive composites - they were the ones who took the plunge and went ahead with this innovation (and fly-by-wire for airliners). Now Boeing announces their latest & greatest innovation, namely more composites used in construction of the aircraft, well been there & done that already!

The 7e7 pic above looks like a futuristic 777 concept to me. Although they are promising great advances in interior comfort and "innovative construction", it doesn't seem to offer a great enough leap over anything the competition has to offer (e.g., as far as capacity & flight performance are concerned). Take a look at the A340-500/600 and A380 as examples - even if not meant for the same markets, it shows what a formidable opponent Airbus has become in a mere 30 years. The last thing I want to see is Boeing go by the wayside in the commercial aviation industry, but the time seems ripe for them to use their inventive spirit to get something on the market way beyond what the other guys can offer. Let's hope the 7e7 lives up to its promises.
777... NO! The 7E7 and the 777 have very different concepts... 7E7 isn't all about interior comfort... Sure, that'll be a feature, but not the main point of the 7E7. Do your research, bud.
no duh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2004, 04:13 PM   #28 (permalink)
Master Collector
 
Strategic Air Command's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 816
Default

They better call it the 787!
Strategic Air Command is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2004, 03:56 PM   #29 (permalink)
Jetliner Collector
 
freewing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,148
Wink

Why not 888?




PS. I voted for 787.
freewing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2004, 09:29 AM   #30 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 435
Default

They should continue the trend. 787, 797, 7107, 7117, 7127 etc.....
A345Leadership is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2004, 11:29 AM   #31 (permalink)
Hapag-Lloyd
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by INTENSS
That's about a THIRD of the entire history of aviation. I'd say they've had plenty of time.....that and the inflow of cash from taxpayers of numerous European countries.

-Rich
Yep, agreed! Fortunately, Boeing is playing it fair by paying all r+d for their military planes themselves, being such a patriotic company that they are simply not willing to make a profit from their military sales, so that no money will spill over to the civilian aircraft sector. This way, the American taxpayer is spared from subsidizing Boeing, and free market becomes reality....

Whaddaya mean, time to wake up ´n´ go to work? I was having such a nice dream...

BTW: the 7e7 will be called Airbus 370.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 03:08 AM   #32 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 629
Default

Fact of the matter is, both manufacturers receive some form of aid or subsidies from their respective governments. But such is needed these days or how else will they get projects off the ground? That's why airlines use loans to pay for new aircraft and not their own pockets because it'd suck them dry. I'm sure many of you are aware that when the US government buys a plane from Boeing they like to give them a little ''tip'' paying more than the list price. It just happened again recently when the US government approved funding for a number of 764 tankers. They've also granted Boeing considerable tax breaks, in a way, aiding their manufacturer. But personally I don't care if the US government chooses to subsidize Boeing (be it direct or indirect, they subsidize agriculture, same can go for Boeing) because while I may lean towards Airbus, both manufacturers are vital in the marketplace because their cut-throat competition serves as a huge incentive to improve their product. Last thing we'd want is an inefficient monopoly on aircraft. Who knows, maybe next decade will see the comeback of Boeing. Who knows, maybe my preference may then lean towards them. It's the beauty of competition.

Quote:
Originally posted by no duh!
777... NO! The 7E7 and the 777 have very different concepts... 7E7 isn't all about interior comfort... Sure, that'll be a feature, but not the main point of the 7E7. Do your research, bud.
That wasn't his point. Sgt. Caribou's point was that the 7E7 isn't really much of a revolutionary aircraft. It's just a continuation of what exists. I realise that it will be much more efficient, but still at the end of the day it'd be a regular airliner.
Richard Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:48 AM   #33 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 405
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Richard Allen
That wasn't his point. Sgt. Caribou's point was that the 7E7 isn't really much of a revolutionary aircraft. It's just a continuation of what exists. I realise that it will be much more efficient, but still at the end of the day it'd be a regular airliner.
Umm... Right....

We might as well be flying wood and muslin aircrafts for now.
no duh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 11:23 AM   #34 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 23
Default

How about 7Zzzzzzzz7? Since it is also know as the Dreamliner.
RafflesAir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 12:49 AM   #35 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,172
Default Re: I rather have it stay as the 7E7 instead of a stupid 787.

Quote:
Originally posted by no duh!
I propose the Dreamliner to be designated in the 8 _ 8 series for a new era of commercial airplanes. Afterall, 50% composite materials for an aircraft is a big step from using 80% aluminum. Come on, 100 years ago, planes were made from wood and muslin, then came metal, now it's composites. I want 8(something)8, like the 808. The 7_7 era was a great one, but let's move on. Don't let traditions inhibit progession! Build upon progression to create tradition. That sounded stupid, so I'll stop here.

I remembered someone wanting to do a fantasy aircraft, something similar to the 727. I found the picture. Sadly, if the Dreamliner is designated the 787, it is a shame for the artist who named his conceptual aircraft.

Presenting the Boeing 787-300 by dkdesign...
man I wish this was the actual aircraft being that it looks a lot like the 727 but I just saw some pictures of the 7e7 and it looks nice very diffrent than ohter boeing jets. does anyone know when the first flight is? if anyone knows.

Last edited by LAX1983; 04-22-2004 at 12:52 AM.
LAX1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2004, 07:56 PM   #36 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 845
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by newsnerd99
Well, it definetly has to have a 7 in it...every Boeing since the 30's (I think) has had some 7 connection...B-52 (5+2=7), B-47, B-17, B-29 (9-2=7). Maybe they will introduce an entirely new equation!
Wow, that pretty kool the whole 7 thing. I think they will make it the 7E7 or the 8E8. and then it will be 8F8, 8G8, etc.
McLaren3465 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 01:29 PM   #37 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 899
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally posted by Galapagapop
Rumors are its to be the 808, because they want to enter a new era, so get rid of the 7 and add an 8
Naming this airplane the 808 makes total sense. As you mention, this model series marks a beginning of new era...which Boeing deserves.

B2
Boeing SST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2004, 02:44 PM   #38 (permalink)
Lunar loops!
 
AirDar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Land of BBQ & thin chips
Posts: 1,788
Talking

Quote:
Originally posted by newsnerd99
Well, it definetly has to have a 7 in it...every Boeing since the 30's (I think) has had some 7 connection...B-52 (5+2=7), B-47, B-17, B-29 (9-2=7). Maybe they will introduce an entirely new equation!
I understand that Boeing is looking at a whole NEW kind of naming convention for this bird when it finally goes into production. Based on the number of orders for the 7E7 vs. the A380, they are going to drop the Dreamliner name and call it the "Future". Since the prototype is the first one in this series, the production model will be the second. Hence the name will be the "Future-2" and shortened to:

FU-2!
__________________
Dar~

He lives in a world of fantasy
...and that's a world I'd like to see!
AirDar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 03:17 AM   #39 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: INDY
Posts: 296
Default 7e7

I predict it will be the "808" I agree with the reasons the others gave, plus, look at the A380. Do you know why Airbus went with the A380, instead of A350, or A360, or A370?

It's because oriental people associate the number 8 (infinity) with good luck. Where are most of the worlds high density air routes, in Asia, right? Airbus's marketing folks knew what they were aiming for.

Boeing is going to name this puppy the 808. Period.
B787Dreamliner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 01:18 PM   #40 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 405
Default Re: 7e7

Quote:
Originally posted by John Giambone
I predict it will be the "808" I agree with the reasons the others gave, plus, look at the A380. Do you know why Airbus went with the A380, instead of A350, or A360, or A370?

It's because oriental people associate the number 8 (infinity) with good luck. Where are most of the worlds high density air routes, in Asia, right? Airbus's marketing folks knew what they were aiming for.

Boeing is going to name this puppy the 808. Period.

Now really... 8 because it's a lucky number in the orient?! Come on! 4 is bad luck, because it has the same phonetics for the word 'death...' But look where the 747 has gone.
no duh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 03:00 PM   #41 (permalink)
aka "Mac•Nut•One"
 
MarinerOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: SAN
Age: 51
Posts: 3,939
Default Re: Re: 7e7

Quote:
Come on! 4 is bad luck, because it has the same phonetics for the word 'death'. But look where the 747 has gone.
Not trying to be funny here at all, but as successful as the 747 has been for Boeing, there have certainly been many associated major fatalities with this plane, in particular the two jumbos at Tenerife. Not all are the fault of Boeing obviously, but some were very mysterious (TWA 800 for example) and could be considered bad 'karma' due to the number '4', if you believe in that stuff.

Conversely, the other Boeing airplanes have had significant crashes as well, but not on the scale of the 747s. The Triple-7 has had an exemplary record in its near decade in service.

Further to the point of 'lucky' numbers, if Boeing were to name the 7e7 the 787, that would also be good 'karma' or 'feng shui' because it contains the number '8'. Either way, as the 787 or the 808, it should be a safe winner ... as it appears it already is with 50 firm orders from All Nippon Airways.



Check out this thread about more possible 7e7 sales


Last edited by MarinerOne; 05-25-2004 at 03:07 PM.
MarinerOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2004, 01:50 AM   #42 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 18
Default

Obviously I'm not as knowledgable about this, because I'm learning stuff as a scroll down, so that having been said, which market is this supposed to cater to? I'm sure its long-haul, but is it like a JFK-LAX, or LHR-HKG, or can it be used for a variety of flights? Secondly, is this supposed to be replacing one of the Boeing lineup?
AmericanAirlines#1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:00 AM.

Latest Threads
- by BA2936
- by Eric w
- by Antws
 

Models of the Week
 



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.